I've got a couple of Nikons that I like, but I'm considering the X-T2 as a travelling camera (a lot lighter than the Nikon D800).
]]>Dielectric gel helps.
]]>Only downside is that while the Fuji lenses (even the relatively humble "kit" lenses which come in bundled packages) are extremely good they're quite expensive and there aren't any cheaper third party alternatives available. As a result I'm still saving up (and trying to justify) one of their rather lovely and tremendously useful "pancake" wide angle lenses for indoor, and low/available light use...
]]>Apple no longer supports Aperture.
Until I find a suitable replacement, getting an X-T2 means editing pictures one-at-a-time in Affinity Photo and keeping them manually indexed in folders. (Can't use Apple's Photos, as it would mean updating my OS which would break Aperture.)
I don't want to pay a subscription to access my pictures, which eliminates Lightroom. (The pay-once version of Lightroom doesn't support the Fuji X-T2.)
I looked at PhotoMechanic, but it's expensive for what it does. I'm going to look at darktable over the summer.
]]>Given some of the issues raised about the variability of exactly which colors can be captured accurately am curious to know what impact this might have in studying/photographing cells in bio/med. That is, whether the colors that show up on film can potentially mislead. Aware that concern isn't as great a for astronomy since most astronomy photos are usually rendered off computerized wavelength collector data.
http://www.space.com/8059-truth-photos-hubble-space-telescope-sees.html
Given that some equipment/lenses already can capture IR images, surprised that no one's concerned about potential privacy and security issues stemming from this.
Tying in to UFOs ... thanks to smartphones, there are now more people than ever with cameras in their hands 24/7(literally), yet fewer check-out stand mags showing pix of UFOs. Interesting.
]]>